%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E-SAT---3.5.1
% Problem : SEU126+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Sep 24 02:28:09 PM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.15s 5.47s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 7
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 21 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 66 ( 19 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 20 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 67 ( 22 ~; 31 |; 8 &)
% ( 3 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 17 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 4 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 43 ( 0 sgn 28 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t12_xboole_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> set_union2(X1,X2) = X2 ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',t12_xboole_1) ).
fof(d3_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X1)
=> in(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d3_tarski) ).
fof(d2_xboole_0,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( X3 = set_union2(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X4] :
( in(X4,X3)
<=> ( in(X4,X2)
| in(X4,X1) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',d2_xboole_0) ).
fof(commutativity_k2_xboole_0,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : set_union2(X1,X2) = set_union2(X2,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',commutativity_k2_xboole_0) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> set_union2(X1,X2) = X2 ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t12_xboole_1]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X20,X21,X22,X23,X24] :
( ( subset(X23,X24)
| ~ in(esk2_2(X23,X24),X24) )
& ( subset(X23,X24)
| in(esk2_2(X23,X24),X23) )
& ( in(X22,X21)
| ~ in(X22,X20)
| ~ subset(X20,X21) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d3_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( set_union2(esk5_0,esk6_0) != esk6_0
& subset(esk5_0,esk6_0) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X11,X12,X13,X14,X15,X16,X17,X18] :
( ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
| in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X17)
| in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X16)
| in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18) )
& ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
| ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
| ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X17) )
& ( X18 = set_union2(X16,X17)
| ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X18)
| ~ in(esk1_3(X16,X17,X18),X16) )
& ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
| in(X15,X13)
| ~ in(X15,X12) )
& ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
| in(X15,X13)
| ~ in(X15,X11) )
& ( X13 != set_union2(X11,X12)
| in(X14,X12)
| in(X14,X11)
| ~ in(X14,X13) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d2_xboole_0])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( ~ in(X3,X1)
| ~ subset(X1,X2)
| in(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk5_0,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X3 = set_union2(X1,X2)
| in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X2)
| in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
fof(c_0_11,plain,
! [X7,X8] : set_union2(X7,X8) = set_union2(X8,X7),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[commutativity_k2_xboole_0]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
( ~ in(X1,esk5_0)
| in(X1,esk6_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
( in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X1),X2)
| in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X1),X1)
| set_union2(X1,X2) = X1 ),
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
set_union2(esk5_0,esk6_0) != esk6_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
set_union2(X1,X2) = set_union2(X2,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk1_3(X1,esk5_0,X1),X1)
| in(esk1_3(X1,esk5_0,X1),esk6_0)
| set_union2(X1,esk5_0) = X1 ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_13]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
set_union2(esk6_0,esk5_0) != esk6_0,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( ~ in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X3)
| ~ in(esk1_3(X1,X2,X3),X1)
| X3 = set_union2(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
in(esk1_3(esk6_0,esk5_0,esk6_0),esk6_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]),c_0_19])]),c_0_17]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : SEU126+1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.05 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.11/5.37 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.11/5.37 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.11/5.37 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.11/5.37 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.11/5.37 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.11/5.37 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.11/5.37 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.11/5.37 % DateTime : Mon Sep 21 05:52:44 UTC 2026
% 0.11/5.38 % CPUTime :
% 0.11/5.38 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.15/5.42 Running first-order theorem proving
% 0.15/5.42 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/5.47 % Version: 3.5.1
% 0.15/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting new_bool_1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting sh5l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 282323 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Result found by G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/5.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/5.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.47 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_S059I with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting new_bool_3 with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 282329 completed with status 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Result found by G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/5.47 % Preprocessing class: FSMSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.15/5.47 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % (lift_lambdas = 1, lambda_to_forall = 1,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.15/5.47 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/5.47 % Search class: FGHSM-FFMS32-SFFFFFNN
% 0.15/5.47 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 5 cores with 1500 seconds (1500 total)
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SOS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 151s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Starting G-E--_301_C18_F1_URBAN_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 136s (1) cores
% 0.15/5.47 % Preprocessing time : 0.002 s
% 0.15/5.47
% 0.15/5.47 % Proof found!
% 0.15/5.47 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.15/5.47 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.15/5.47 % Parsed axioms : 19
% 0.15/5.47 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Initial clauses : 29
% 0.15/5.47 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 2
% 0.15/5.47 % Initial clauses in saturation : 27
% 0.15/5.47 % Processed clauses : 291
% 0.15/5.47 % ...of these trivial : 5
% 0.15/5.47 % ...subsumed : 144
% 0.15/5.47 % ...remaining for further processing : 142
% 0.15/5.47 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 11
% 0.15/5.47 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Backward-subsumed : 4
% 0.15/5.47 % Backward-rewritten : 3
% 0.15/5.47 % Generated clauses : 1134
% 0.15/5.47 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 1010
% 0.15/5.47 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Paramodulations : 1010
% 0.15/5.47 % Factorizations : 110
% 0.15/5.47 % NegExts : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Equation resolutions : 14
% 0.15/5.47 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Total rewrite steps : 390
% 0.15/5.47 % ...of those cached : 338
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.15/5.47 % Current number of processed clauses : 133
% 0.15/5.47 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 15
% 0.15/5.47 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.15/5.47 % Negative unit clauses : 3
% 0.15/5.47 % Non-unit-clauses : 114
% 0.15/5.47 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 733
% 0.15/5.47 % ...number of literals in the above : 2643
% 0.15/5.47 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Current number of archived clauses : 7
% 0.15/5.47 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1881
% 0.15/5.47 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1087
% 0.15/5.47 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 142
% 0.15/5.47 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 54
% 0.15/5.47 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % BW rewrite match attempts : 22
% 0.15/5.47 % BW rewrite match successes : 10
% 0.15/5.47 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.15/5.47 % Termbank termtop insertions : 15620
% 0.15/5.47 % Search garbage collected termcells : 379
% 0.15/5.47
% 0.15/5.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.47 % User time : 0.032 s
% 0.15/5.47 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.15/5.47 % Total time : 0.036 s
% 0.15/5.47 % Maximum resident set size: 3640 pages
% 0.15/5.47
% 0.15/5.47 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.15/5.47 % User time : 0.158 s
% 0.15/5.47 % System time : 0.018 s
% 0.15/5.47 % Total time : 0.176 s
% 0.15/5.47 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.15/5.47 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------